typically I want to hear sound from music. all the crap and bollox that comes with it, I can't be arsed about. they didn't have all that crap in the studio when playing and recording. the artwork is usually made by someone else. I just want to hear the music as close to the original performance/recording as possible with no farting about to listen to it. if you want to fart around with stuff you can do that whilst playing the music from a pc or cd
But then one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
Because of the widely reported CD Loudness war", where CDs have excessively high audio levels leading to a hugely reduced dynamic range, an original vinyl recording of an album is very often much closer to "the original performance/recording" than a remastered CD version will ever be.
I listen to music on vinyl, I never threw mine away, CD, and digitally, but to me there is still a lot of enjoyment to be had playing a vinyl album whilst looking at the album artwork and reading the lyrics.
Of course the artwork is produced by someone else but the likes of Storm Thorgerson and Aubrey Powell with Hipgnosis worked very closely with the the bands they produced album covers for and whose work is very often an integral part of that bands image.
That is part of the reason behind vinyl's revival.
But then one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
Because of the widely reported CD Loudness war", where CDs have excessively high audio levels leading to a hugely reduced dynamic range, an original vinyl recording of an album is very often much closer to "the original performance/recording" than a remastered CD version will ever be.
I listen to music on vinyl, I never threw mine away, CD, and digitally, but to me there is still a lot of enjoyment to be had playing a vinyl album whilst looking at the album artwork and reading the lyrics.
Of course the artwork is produced by someone else but the likes of Storm Thorgerson and Aubrey Powell with Hipgnosis worked very closely with the the bands they produced album covers for and whose work is very often an integral part of that bands image.
That is part of the reason behind vinyl's revival.
play the cd for the sound quality and fart about with the vinly artwork for the "ultimate" experience. put the record on the turntable, put the needle on, but listen to the cd instead, and you have most of the psychosomatic element
when I mention cd quality compared to vinyl I mean like for like, not a badly mastered version compared to a well mastered version
play the cd for the sound quality and fart about with the vinly artwork for the "ultimate" experience. put the record on the turntable, put the needle on, but listen to the cd instead, and you have most of the psychosomatic element
However to me listening to vinyl, when I choose to, isn't farting about, so I'll chose not to heed your 'advice'.
Like I said, one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
I love a bit of vinyl. Got a few that I play and a few that are sealed. Mainly Kate Bush but also Bowie. Ordered the new Kate Bush Before the Dawn on Vinyl AND CD. I like relaxing on a sunday or doing the housework with the vinyl playing through by Blaupunkt speakers. I'm glad it never truly died off.
Is the crackle, popping and hissing all part of the 'superior' sound quality of vinyl?
Vinyl appeals on various levels.
The album cover and the sleeve notes, sometimes more on the actual inner sleeve, they're more substantial than some of those in CDs
The fact that vinyl needs more care when handled.
Then there's the "kit" to play it, (amplifiers and speakers apart that can also be used for CDs), no end of turntable arms, styli and different cartridges. Often the latter get rebuilt for enthusiasts who want to enjoy the original performance of a vintage one.
Then there's the nostalgia element.
With my two vinyl jukeboxes it's hard to convey the experience of selecting a track from the title cards, pressing the appropriate buttons, hearing the click of the latch solenoid disengage, once the selection is made. The whir of the record carousel as it rotates to the correct position. The noise of the gripper arm selecting the record and placing it on the turntable and the anticipation when the mute relay allows you finally to hear the stylus tracking in before the record starts.
Another advantage of a jukebox is that as the records are "untouched by hand" during the playing process there's less chance of damage. The stylus actually passes over a little cleaning brush on its way to and from the record.
I enjoy listening to music on all sorts of formats. CD, MP3 (or FLAC), SACD, DVD-Audio, even Blu-ray Audio.
I also love listening to music on vinyl, although I'd be the 1st to admit that my vinyl playback equipment is probably quite inferior to my digital front end.
One thing about listening to an album on vinyl, due to the nature of the format, it kinda forces you to listen to an entire album (or a side at least) as a complete entity.
When I see my mate stream music from his PC to his phone, I don't think he's listening to the music that much. Instead, he's looking for the next track to listen to...
I think the way in which music is streamed today, has significantly changed the way we listen to music.
Here's a bit of vinyl trivia, that is the same with CD.
If you're listening to an album of yours which you've not heard for a while. You may not recall which track follows the one to which you are presently listening.
But as soon as you hear the last few bars of the track playing, you remember which track follows.
I enjoy listening to music on all sorts of formats. CD, MP3 (or FLAC), SACD, DVD-Audio, even Blu-ray Audio.
I also love listening to music on vinyl, although I'd be the 1st to admit that my vinyl playback equipment is probably quite inferior to my digital front end.
One thing about listening to an album on vinyl, due to the nature of the format, it kinda forces you to listen to an entire album (or a side at least) as a complete entity.
When I see my mate stream music from his PC to his phone, I don't think he's listening to the music that much. Instead, he's looking for the next track to listen to...
I think the way in which music is streamed today, has significantly changed the way we listen to music.
Now you're talking, listening to muti-channel audio brings a whole new experience to music enjoyment. It's a shame SACD & DVD-A never really took off, have you got much in your collection?
For many, though, it isn't all about nostalgia, despite what is often said claimed on DS.
I started buying albums when I was a teenager in the mid-1070s.
When CDs came along I transitioned to CDs but kept my vinyl and turntable. In the intervening years of my 500+ vinyl albums I would say I've purchased the CD for less than 1%.
Therefore if I want to listen to, say, Led Zepplin III the only option I have is to listen to it on vinyl as I've never purchased it in any digital format.
I don't get the nostalgia thing either. Partly because the vinyl albums I have on the shelves are mostly 1950s jazz, and I was barely a toddler when some of them were released, or contemporary music from the past decade, for which I obviously don't feel any nostalgia.
There are a few albums from the 60s and 70s in there, but I bought them in the past few years because I fancied listening to them.
I do own hundreds of CDs and have quite a few downloads, but vinyl still seems more accessible. To listen to a download on the hifi I have to turn on the TV, fire up the Apple TV box, tune to AV2, use the remote control to find the music, make sure the hifi is playing the right input and so on. All the messing about with the television is such a palaver when you can just take a record out of the sleeve and put it on the turntable.
And if you don't use a TV to display your digital music library, you have to use a PC or a phone or a tablet etc and then find a way to stream the music to your hifi. A vinyl album is just a quicker, simpler and more elegant way to play music.
However to me listening to vinyl, when I choose to, isn't farting about, so I'll chose not to heed your 'advice'.
Like I said, one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
However my point is that you can't be sure these days that the CD version you are listening to is the best version.
I would take a properly mastered vinyl over a poorly re-mastered CD any day.
i'd rather take a properly mastered CD over a properly mastered vinly anyday as the cd will reflect the original recording more accurately
what you want to do, what you want to play it's up to you. what people prefer soundwise is up to them. however when it comes to technical aspects and facts, a cd can produce sound more accurately than vinly, and as a fan of music i prefer my reproduction to sound as accurate as possible and things like touching covers etc don't concern me as those are seperate things to the sound being created during playback
The album cover and the sleeve notes, sometimes more on the actual inner sleeve, they're more substantial than some of those in CDs
The fact that vinyl needs more care when handled.
Then there's the "kit" to play it, (amplifiers and speakers apart that can also be used for CDs), no end of turntable arms, styli and different cartridges. Often the latter get rebuilt for enthusiasts who want to enjoy the original performance of a vintage one.
Then there's the nostalgia element.
With my two vinyl jukeboxes it's hard to convey the experience of selecting a track from the title cards, pressing the appropriate buttons, hearing the click of the latch solenoid disengage, once the selection is made. The whir of the record carousel as it rotates to the correct position. The noise of the gripper arm selecting the record and placing it on the turntable and the anticipation when the mute relay allows you finally to hear the stylus tracking in before the record starts.
Another advantage of a jukebox is that as the records are "untouched by hand" during the playing process there's less chance of damage. The stylus actually passes over a little cleaning brush on its way to and from the record.
most of what you say about the appeal of vinly over cd relates to things other than the actual sound of the music, and when discussing this with others it's usually the same end result. people say they prefer vinly cuz of artwork and physical aspects of touching, rather than the actual sound
or when the preference is about sound - it's generally because they are used to muddy bottom end and rolled off top end and a sound they became accustomed too from old systems of the past, and they don't enjoy the clarity of a high end system
I enjoy listening to music on all sorts of formats. CD, MP3 (or FLAC), SACD, DVD-Audio, even Blu-ray Audio.
I also love listening to music on vinyl, although I'd be the 1st to admit that my vinyl playback equipment is probably quite inferior to my digital front end.
One thing about listening to an album on vinyl, due to the nature of the format, it kinda forces you to listen to an entire album (or a side at least) as a complete entity.
When I see my mate stream music from his PC to his phone, I don't think he's listening to the music that much. Instead, he's looking for the next track to listen to...
I think the way in which music is streamed today, has significantly changed the way we listen to music.
i don't really agree with that. with a cd i can put it in and listen to the full album, even a full double album, without stopping and turning and changing. likewise on a media based system. in fact i tend to make extended playlists of albums adding b sides, outtakes, remixes etc to the end to expand the listening experience
some may prefer shuffle or playing the odd track, but i could do the same on viny on my decks and just cue and play a single track at a time
modern technology gives people the options to play music as they like, more conveniently than before, and in better sound quality than before
personally i prefer listening to an album, or the equivilent of having a full meal of an artist by listening to a long batch of tracks, rather than snacking on individual tracks. shuffle is something i never ever use. i don't want a 20 minute pink floyd track followed by a 2 minute clash track and then a dance mix of kylie coming on next, but then my collection is pretty diverse whilst others may have a less diverse choice of music so shuffle wouldn't be quite as extreme when playing a bunch of rnb tracks that sound like they've been made on the same calculator
I don't get the nostalgia thing either. Partly because the vinyl albums I have on the shelves are mostly 1950s jazz, and I was barely a toddler when some of them were released, or contemporary music from the past decade, for which I obviously don't feel any nostalgia.
There are a few albums from the 60s and 70s in there, but I bought them in the past few years because I fancied listening to them.
I do own hundreds of CDs and have quite a few downloads, but vinyl still seems more accessible. To listen to a download on the hifi I have to turn on the TV, fire up the Apple TV box, tune to AV2, use the remote control to find the music, make sure the hifi is playing the right input and so on. All the messing about with the television is such a palaver when you can just take a record out of the sleeve and put it on the turntable.
And if you don't use a TV to display your digital music library, you have to use a PC or a phone or a tablet etc and then find a way to stream the music to your hifi. A vinyl album is just a quicker, simpler and more elegant way to play music.
it depends on your setup. my opinion is you don't have a good digital setup and it sounds like you don't have a particularly huge collection if you can easily find and play things as quickly as i could on my digital system. with huge collections, it takes a lot of time and effort keeping them in order, adding new stuff on a regular basis. it's basically taking the filing from the office to your home. i have too many cds and records and dvds and tapes to find anything so i rip it and it takes seconds to search and play. faster than the time to take the record out the sleeve, put the stylus down and wait for the music to start
it depends on your setup. my opinion is you don't have a good digital setup and it sounds like you don't have a particularly huge collection if you can easily find and play things as quickly as i could on my digital system. with huge collections, it takes a lot of time and effort keeping them in order, adding new stuff on a regular basis. it's basically taking the filing from the office to your home. i have too many cds and records and dvds and tapes to find anything so i rip it and it takes seconds to search and play. faster than the time to take the record out the sleeve, put the stylus down and wait for the music to start
My digital set-up is basically an iTunes library played from the cloud on an Apple TV box into a DAC that plugs into a Linn CD/tuner/amp. The sound is pretty good, it's just not very user-friendly. If I could afford a high-end digital system I would get one, though I wouldn't want to lose the analogue amplifier for the phono input.
Now you're talking, listening to muti-channel audio brings a whole new experience to music enjoyment. It's a shame SACD & DVD-A never really took off, have you got much in your collection?
I loves me some multi-channel music.
SACD and DVD-Audio both had their best chance of success when they were launched way back then. At the time, modest 5.1 surround systems were everywhere, every top end TV had Dolby Pro-Logic, and some DVD/amp combos (noticably from Sony) even had SACD playback capabilities. Surround sound was the hot thing in the early 90s which coincided nicely with the launch of DVD.
However multi-channel music just never really captured the public's imagination. A shame, since as you say, some music in multi-channel just ROCKS.
To answer your question, I've some stunning sounding SACDs. Dire Straits:Brothers in Arms, Steely Dan:Gaucho, Jeff Wayne: War of the Worlds, The Moody Blues catalogue...
DVD-Audio wise, I've quite a few of the Porcupine Tree albums, some REM...
The problem with SACD and DVD-Audio, is they are getting harder to find, and hence, more expensive!
Blu-ray Audio, well I'm sure Mr Steven Wilson needs no introduction! Hand Cannot Erase, Luminol, Grace For Drowning, his Yes remixes etc....
I've even got some Olde Worlde DTS CDs! These are all lossy, obviously, but still sound absolutely STUNNING. Which kinda goes to show that it's the mastering that is probably the most influential factor in sound quality, at the end of the day.
I'm deffo an audio format junkie! I bought a Denon mini-disc deck earlier this year... :-)
Getting back to vinyl: some recent releases have amazing sound quality, pressed on 180 gram, quiet, (expensive!), vinyl. I recently picked up 2 Pink Floyd albums, The Wall, and The Division Bell. Both of which sound stunning, especially The Division Bell.
To anybody that remembers vinyl records as noisey, scratchy affairs with horribly compressed audio, I think they may have been listening to some horrid digital/CD transfers that plagued the 80s especially. Instead, why not pop into a HiFi shop and listen to a decent turntable? It may make you re-evaluate what vinyl records are all about.
Sure, the whole 'playback' ritual and pride of ownership does play a BIG part, but the SQ of especially some of the stellar releases now is something very special.
i don't really agree with that. with a cd i can put it in and listen to the full album, even a full double album, without stopping and turning and changing. likewise on a media based system. in fact i tend to make extended playlists of albums adding b sides, outtakes, remixes etc to the end to expand the listening experience
some may prefer shuffle or playing the odd track, but i could do the same on viny on my decks and just cue and play a single track at a time
modern technology gives people the options to play music as they like, more conveniently than before, and in better sound quality than before
personally i prefer listening to an album, or the equivilent of having a full meal of an artist by listening to a long batch of tracks, rather than snacking on individual tracks. shuffle is something i never ever use. i don't want a 20 minute pink floyd track followed by a 2 minute clash track and then a dance mix of kylie coming on next, but then my collection is pretty diverse whilst others may have a less diverse choice of music so shuffle wouldn't be quite as extreme when playing a bunch of rnb tracks that sound like they've been made on the same calculator
That's fair enough. I think we could be in the minority nowadays though (listening to a whole album). The point I was trying to make was, I think technology has changed the way many people listen to music. The concept of listening to an entire album, start to finish may not be something as popular as it used to be, whatever the medium.
I also think that not as many people actually sit down and listen to an album (or even a single piece) and give it their full attention anymore.
(I could be wrong, I'm just guessing that's all)
In other words, for a lot of people (not necessarily yourself), listening to music is now just relegated to having something on in the background. Peoples lives are just too busy, just too full of distractions nowadays, to sit down and play an entire album...
...which is kinda at odds as to why vinyl has become popular again. As its a cumbersome, expensive, fragile format.
Or maybe that's precisely why its back in fashion? It's a rare opportunity (these days) to sit back and focus ones attention on something for a while, and do nothing else...
Maybe it's a nice escape from busy modern life...?
I've had a busy, stressful week. I haven't listened to any music at home all week. But it's Friday, and I'm definitely going to spin Back to Black on vinyl when I get home and can relax.
But thanks to Mr Jurassic's post, I think I'm gonna blast out Tears for Fears: Songs from the Big Chair in its stunning 5.1 remix too!
I loves me some multi-channel music.
SACD and DVD-Audio both had their best chance of success when they were launched way back then. At the time, modest 5.1 surround systems were everywhere, every top end TV had Dolby Pro-Logic, and some DVD/amp combos (noticably from Sony) even had SACD playback capabilities. Surround sound was the hot thing in the early 90s which coincided nicely with the launch of DVD.
However multi-channel music just never really captured the public's imagination. A shame, since as you say, some music in multi-channel just ROCKS.
To answer your question, I've some stunning sounding SACDs. Dire Straits:Brothers in Arms, Steely Dan:Gaucho, Jeff Wayne: War of the Worlds, The Moody Blues catalogue...
DVD-Audio wise, I've quite a few of the Porcupine Tree albums, some REM...
The problem with SACD and DVD-Audio, is they are getting harder to find, and hence, more expensive!
Blu-ray Audio, well I'm sure Mr Steven Wilson needs no introduction! Hand Cannot Erase, Luminol, Grace For Drowning, his Yes remixes etc....
I've even got some Olde Worlde DTS CDs! These are all lossy, obviously, but still sound absolutely STUNNING. Which kinda goes to show that it's the mastering that is probably the most influential factor in sound quality, at the end of the day.
I'm deffo an audio format junkie! I bought a Denon mini-disc deck earlier this year... :-)
Getting back to vinyl: some recent releases have amazing sound quality, pressed on 180 gram, quiet, (expensive!), vinyl. I recently picked up 2 Pink Floyd albums, The Wall, and The Division Bell. Both of which sound stunning, especially The Division Bell.
To anybody that remembers vinyl records as noisey, scratchy affairs with horribly compressed audio, I think they may have been listening to some horrid digital/CD transfers that plagued the 80s especially. Instead, why not pop into a HiFi shop and listen to a decent turntable? It may make you re-evaluate what vinyl records are all about.
Sure, the whole 'playback' ritual and pride of ownership does play a BIG part, but the SQ of especially some of the stellar releases now is something very special.
Remember hearing about SACD in its early days and thought it would slowly replace CD and didn't think much more about it. That never happened but it was later brought to my attention again when one of my favourite bands, Depeche Mode, started releasing their old albums in SACD format. Then also noticed the multi-channel capabilities of the format which was something I didn't initially realise. Decided to but one to try out and it reinvigorated my experience listening to their music, ended up getting all their back catalogue in this format.
My main interest is electronic music but my favourite SACD is probably Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits who are not really in that category but as you said, it's stunning. Also own a few DVD-A discs, one of my favourites is DE9: Transitions by Richie Hawtin and as it says in this review, "Hawtin has carefully arranged the mix to make full use of surround sound: this is the format he intends the mix to be heard in. Indeed, this is the ultimate for techno-loving audiophiles." I'm a techno-loving audiophile so it's right up my street.
Have got one Depeche Mode blu-ray audio disc but doubt this format is going to take off any more than SACD or DVD-A did. Not so much an audio format junkie myself, would hate to go back to using cassettes and haven't completely ruled out vinyl but currently consider it too high maintenance for me.
Remember hearing about SACD in its early days and thought it would slowly replace CD and didn't think much more about it. That never happened but it was later brought to my attention again when one of my favourite bands, Depeche Mode, started releasing their old albums in SACD format. Then also noticed the multi-channel capabilities of the format which was something I didn't initially realise. Decided to but one to try out and it reinvigorated my experience listening to their music, ended up getting all their back catalogue in this format.
My main interest is electronic music but my favourite SACD is probably Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits who are not really in that category but as you said, it's stunning. Also own a few DVD-A discs, one of my favourites is DE9: Transitions by Richie Hawtin and as it says in this review, "Hawtin has carefully arranged the mix to make full use of surround sound: this is the format he intends the mix to be heard in. Indeed, this is the ultimate for techno-loving audiophiles." I'm a techno-loving audiophile so it's right up my street.
Have got one Depeche Mode blu-ray audio disc but doubt this format is going to take off any more than SACD or DVD-A did. Not so much an audio format junkie myself, would hate to go back to using cassettes and haven't completely ruled out vinyl but currently consider it too high maintenance for me.
Ah... Depeche Mode. Violator on SACD is especially rare and expensive these days. I didn't know DM had released on Blu-ray Audio? Which album(s)? You're about to cost me some money aren't you....
Blu-ray Audio, frankly, has an even better chance of success than SACD or DVD-Audio IMO. It's cheaper and easier! All you need for that format is the cheapest supermarket special Blu-ray player, and you're ready to go. The BD player just acts as a digital transport, and feeds its data via HDMI to a nice amp and speakers. Here, you can concentrate your budget on said amp/speakers rather than the playback device. No need for an expensive multi-format player anymore.
Did you know that Arcam now sell a 2 channel HDMI equipped amplifier? Check it out: Linky
It's a digital HiFi stereo amplifier for the HDMI generation.
If you don't own Steely Dan:Gaucho on SACD you owe it to yourself to grab a copy. The sound, is just wonderful. Thanks to you, I was listening to it at 12:30 this morning!
Ah... Depeche Mode. Violator on SACD is especially rare and expensive these days. I didn't know DM had released on Blu-ray Audio? Which album(s)? You're about to cost me some money aren't you....
Blu-ray Audio, frankly, has an even better chance of success than SACD or DVD-Audio IMO. It's cheaper and easier! All you need for that format is the cheapest supermarket special Blu-ray player, and you're ready to go. The BD player just acts as a digital transport, and feeds its data via HDMI to a nice amp and speakers. Here, you can concentrate your budget on said amp/speakers rather than the playback device. No need for an expensive multi-format player anymore.
Did you know that Arcam now sell a 2 channel HDMI equipped amplifier? Check it out: Linky
It's a digital HiFi stereo amplifier for the HDMI generation.
If you don't own Steely Dan:Gaucho on SACD you owe it to yourself to grab a copy. The sound, is just wonderful. Thanks to you, I was listening to it at 12:30 this morning!
Depeche Mode released this Live In Berlin - (Deluxe Boxset) which had the odd combination of having the live concert on DVD only but had their 'Delta Machine' album in 5.1 audio on blu-ray. Cost me £20.99 when I bought it.
Hope blu-ray audio does take off but I'm just not seeing much customer interest, apart from your good self I can't remember discussing this with anyone else on this forum and I have mentioned multi-channel audio a few times. Have been to a few hi-fi and home entertainment type shows but have not seen anyone demonstrating multi-channel audio, I may not have got into it myself if it wasn't for Depeche Mode. Perhaps FMs reading our posts will spark an interest and we'll gain a new fan of multi-channel audio, but probably not.
Comments
But then one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
Because of the widely reported CD Loudness war", where CDs have excessively high audio levels leading to a hugely reduced dynamic range, an original vinyl recording of an album is very often much closer to "the original performance/recording" than a remastered CD version will ever be.
I listen to music on vinyl, I never threw mine away, CD, and digitally, but to me there is still a lot of enjoyment to be had playing a vinyl album whilst looking at the album artwork and reading the lyrics.
Of course the artwork is produced by someone else but the likes of Storm Thorgerson and Aubrey Powell with Hipgnosis worked very closely with the the bands they produced album covers for and whose work is very often an integral part of that bands image.
That is part of the reason behind vinyl's revival.
play the cd for the sound quality and fart about with the vinly artwork for the "ultimate" experience. put the record on the turntable, put the needle on, but listen to the cd instead, and you have most of the psychosomatic element
when I mention cd quality compared to vinyl I mean like for like, not a badly mastered version compared to a well mastered version
However to me listening to vinyl, when I choose to, isn't farting about, so I'll chose not to heed your 'advice'.
Like I said, one person's 'farting about' is another person's listening pleasure.
However my point is that you can't be sure these days that the CD version you are listening to is the best version.
I would take a properly mastered vinyl over a poorly re-mastered CD any day.
I've always looked after my vinyl and don't have those problems.
I would never say vinyl is 'superior' to CD because, all things being equal, it isn't.
However because of phenomena such as the 'Loudness wars' I mentioned earlier that advantage can be severely diminished.
Vinyl appeals on various levels.
The album cover and the sleeve notes, sometimes more on the actual inner sleeve, they're more substantial than some of those in CDs
The fact that vinyl needs more care when handled.
Then there's the "kit" to play it, (amplifiers and speakers apart that can also be used for CDs), no end of turntable arms, styli and different cartridges. Often the latter get rebuilt for enthusiasts who want to enjoy the original performance of a vintage one.
Then there's the nostalgia element.
With my two vinyl jukeboxes it's hard to convey the experience of selecting a track from the title cards, pressing the appropriate buttons, hearing the click of the latch solenoid disengage, once the selection is made. The whir of the record carousel as it rotates to the correct position. The noise of the gripper arm selecting the record and placing it on the turntable and the anticipation when the mute relay allows you finally to hear the stylus tracking in before the record starts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bREaIWiXpKs
Another advantage of a jukebox is that as the records are "untouched by hand" during the playing process there's less chance of damage. The stylus actually passes over a little cleaning brush on its way to and from the record.
I also love listening to music on vinyl, although I'd be the 1st to admit that my vinyl playback equipment is probably quite inferior to my digital front end.
One thing about listening to an album on vinyl, due to the nature of the format, it kinda forces you to listen to an entire album (or a side at least) as a complete entity.
When I see my mate stream music from his PC to his phone, I don't think he's listening to the music that much. Instead, he's looking for the next track to listen to...
I think the way in which music is streamed today, has significantly changed the way we listen to music.
Here's a bit of vinyl trivia, that is the same with CD.
If you're listening to an album of yours which you've not heard for a while. You may not recall which track follows the one to which you are presently listening.
But as soon as you hear the last few bars of the track playing, you remember which track follows.
Now you're talking, listening to muti-channel audio brings a whole new experience to music enjoyment. It's a shame SACD & DVD-A never really took off, have you got much in your collection?
For many, though, it isn't all about nostalgia, despite what is often said claimed on DS.
I started buying albums when I was a teenager in the mid-1070s.
When CDs came along I transitioned to CDs but kept my vinyl and turntable. In the intervening years of my 500+ vinyl albums I would say I've purchased the CD for less than 1%.
Therefore if I want to listen to, say, Led Zepplin III the only option I have is to listen to it on vinyl as I've never purchased it in any digital format.
There are a few albums from the 60s and 70s in there, but I bought them in the past few years because I fancied listening to them.
I do own hundreds of CDs and have quite a few downloads, but vinyl still seems more accessible. To listen to a download on the hifi I have to turn on the TV, fire up the Apple TV box, tune to AV2, use the remote control to find the music, make sure the hifi is playing the right input and so on. All the messing about with the television is such a palaver when you can just take a record out of the sleeve and put it on the turntable.
And if you don't use a TV to display your digital music library, you have to use a PC or a phone or a tablet etc and then find a way to stream the music to your hifi. A vinyl album is just a quicker, simpler and more elegant way to play music.
i'd rather take a properly mastered CD over a properly mastered vinly anyday as the cd will reflect the original recording more accurately
what you want to do, what you want to play it's up to you. what people prefer soundwise is up to them. however when it comes to technical aspects and facts, a cd can produce sound more accurately than vinly, and as a fan of music i prefer my reproduction to sound as accurate as possible and things like touching covers etc don't concern me as those are seperate things to the sound being created during playback
most of what you say about the appeal of vinly over cd relates to things other than the actual sound of the music, and when discussing this with others it's usually the same end result. people say they prefer vinly cuz of artwork and physical aspects of touching, rather than the actual sound
or when the preference is about sound - it's generally because they are used to muddy bottom end and rolled off top end and a sound they became accustomed too from old systems of the past, and they don't enjoy the clarity of a high end system
i don't really agree with that. with a cd i can put it in and listen to the full album, even a full double album, without stopping and turning and changing. likewise on a media based system. in fact i tend to make extended playlists of albums adding b sides, outtakes, remixes etc to the end to expand the listening experience
some may prefer shuffle or playing the odd track, but i could do the same on viny on my decks and just cue and play a single track at a time
modern technology gives people the options to play music as they like, more conveniently than before, and in better sound quality than before
personally i prefer listening to an album, or the equivilent of having a full meal of an artist by listening to a long batch of tracks, rather than snacking on individual tracks. shuffle is something i never ever use. i don't want a 20 minute pink floyd track followed by a 2 minute clash track and then a dance mix of kylie coming on next, but then my collection is pretty diverse whilst others may have a less diverse choice of music so shuffle wouldn't be quite as extreme when playing a bunch of rnb tracks that sound like they've been made on the same calculator
it depends on your setup. my opinion is you don't have a good digital setup and it sounds like you don't have a particularly huge collection if you can easily find and play things as quickly as i could on my digital system. with huge collections, it takes a lot of time and effort keeping them in order, adding new stuff on a regular basis. it's basically taking the filing from the office to your home. i have too many cds and records and dvds and tapes to find anything so i rip it and it takes seconds to search and play. faster than the time to take the record out the sleeve, put the stylus down and wait for the music to start
My digital set-up is basically an iTunes library played from the cloud on an Apple TV box into a DAC that plugs into a Linn CD/tuner/amp. The sound is pretty good, it's just not very user-friendly. If I could afford a high-end digital system I would get one, though I wouldn't want to lose the analogue amplifier for the phono input.
I loves me some multi-channel music.
SACD and DVD-Audio both had their best chance of success when they were launched way back then. At the time, modest 5.1 surround systems were everywhere, every top end TV had Dolby Pro-Logic, and some DVD/amp combos (noticably from Sony) even had SACD playback capabilities. Surround sound was the hot thing in the early 90s which coincided nicely with the launch of DVD.
However multi-channel music just never really captured the public's imagination. A shame, since as you say, some music in multi-channel just ROCKS.
To answer your question, I've some stunning sounding SACDs. Dire Straits:Brothers in Arms, Steely Dan:Gaucho, Jeff Wayne: War of the Worlds, The Moody Blues catalogue...
DVD-Audio wise, I've quite a few of the Porcupine Tree albums, some REM...
The problem with SACD and DVD-Audio, is they are getting harder to find, and hence, more expensive!
Blu-ray Audio, well I'm sure Mr Steven Wilson needs no introduction! Hand Cannot Erase, Luminol, Grace For Drowning, his Yes remixes etc....
I've even got some Olde Worlde DTS CDs! These are all lossy, obviously, but still sound absolutely STUNNING. Which kinda goes to show that it's the mastering that is probably the most influential factor in sound quality, at the end of the day.
I'm deffo an audio format junkie! I bought a Denon mini-disc deck earlier this year... :-)
Getting back to vinyl: some recent releases have amazing sound quality, pressed on 180 gram, quiet, (expensive!), vinyl. I recently picked up 2 Pink Floyd albums, The Wall, and The Division Bell. Both of which sound stunning, especially The Division Bell.
To anybody that remembers vinyl records as noisey, scratchy affairs with horribly compressed audio, I think they may have been listening to some horrid digital/CD transfers that plagued the 80s especially. Instead, why not pop into a HiFi shop and listen to a decent turntable? It may make you re-evaluate what vinyl records are all about.
Sure, the whole 'playback' ritual and pride of ownership does play a BIG part, but the SQ of especially some of the stellar releases now is something very special.
That's fair enough. I think we could be in the minority nowadays though (listening to a whole album). The point I was trying to make was, I think technology has changed the way many people listen to music. The concept of listening to an entire album, start to finish may not be something as popular as it used to be, whatever the medium.
I also think that not as many people actually sit down and listen to an album (or even a single piece) and give it their full attention anymore.
(I could be wrong, I'm just guessing that's all)
In other words, for a lot of people (not necessarily yourself), listening to music is now just relegated to having something on in the background. Peoples lives are just too busy, just too full of distractions nowadays, to sit down and play an entire album...
...which is kinda at odds as to why vinyl has become popular again. As its a cumbersome, expensive, fragile format.
Or maybe that's precisely why its back in fashion? It's a rare opportunity (these days) to sit back and focus ones attention on something for a while, and do nothing else...
Maybe it's a nice escape from busy modern life...?
I've had a busy, stressful week. I haven't listened to any music at home all week. But it's Friday, and I'm definitely going to spin Back to Black on vinyl when I get home and can relax.
But thanks to Mr Jurassic's post, I think I'm gonna blast out Tears for Fears: Songs from the Big Chair in its stunning 5.1 remix too!
It seems it's always been pretty common practice to stick a few crap tunes on some albums.
Remember hearing about SACD in its early days and thought it would slowly replace CD and didn't think much more about it. That never happened but it was later brought to my attention again when one of my favourite bands, Depeche Mode, started releasing their old albums in SACD format. Then also noticed the multi-channel capabilities of the format which was something I didn't initially realise. Decided to but one to try out and it reinvigorated my experience listening to their music, ended up getting all their back catalogue in this format.
My main interest is electronic music but my favourite SACD is probably Brothers in Arms by Dire Straits who are not really in that category but as you said, it's stunning. Also own a few DVD-A discs, one of my favourites is DE9: Transitions by Richie Hawtin and as it says in this review, "Hawtin has carefully arranged the mix to make full use of surround sound: this is the format he intends the mix to be heard in. Indeed, this is the ultimate for techno-loving audiophiles." I'm a techno-loving audiophile so it's right up my street.
Have got one Depeche Mode blu-ray audio disc but doubt this format is going to take off any more than SACD or DVD-A did.
So a YouTube video downloaded as an mp3 is a useful alternative.
If this facility wasn't available I wouldn't bother with a lot of stuff.
Though I do occasionally buy a CD.
Ah... Depeche Mode. Violator on SACD is especially rare and expensive these days. I didn't know DM had released on Blu-ray Audio? Which album(s)? You're about to cost me some money aren't you....
Blu-ray Audio, frankly, has an even better chance of success than SACD or DVD-Audio IMO. It's cheaper and easier! All you need for that format is the cheapest supermarket special Blu-ray player, and you're ready to go. The BD player just acts as a digital transport, and feeds its data via HDMI to a nice amp and speakers. Here, you can concentrate your budget on said amp/speakers rather than the playback device. No need for an expensive multi-format player anymore.
Did you know that Arcam now sell a 2 channel HDMI equipped amplifier? Check it out:
Linky
It's a digital HiFi stereo amplifier for the HDMI generation.
If you don't own Steely Dan:Gaucho on SACD you owe it to yourself to grab a copy. The sound, is just wonderful. Thanks to you, I was listening to it at 12:30 this morning!
Depeche Mode released this Live In Berlin - (Deluxe Boxset) which had the odd combination of having the live concert on DVD only but had their 'Delta Machine' album in 5.1 audio on blu-ray. Cost me £20.99 when I bought it.
Hope blu-ray audio does take off but I'm just not seeing much customer interest, apart from your good self I can't remember discussing this with anyone else on this forum and I have mentioned multi-channel audio a few times. Have been to a few hi-fi and home entertainment type shows but have not seen anyone demonstrating multi-channel audio, I may not have got into it myself if it wasn't for Depeche Mode. Perhaps FMs reading our posts will spark an interest and we'll gain a new fan of multi-channel audio, but probably not.
Will look out for that Steely Dan SACD.